Jamieson v Chiropractic Board of Australia

[2011] QCA 56

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Limitation of Actions
2. › Extension or postponement of limitation periods
3. › Defamation
4. › Whether not reasonable in the circumstances for plaintiff to have commenced action within one year
5. › Relevance of plaintiff's mental state and personal circumstances
6. › Weight to be given to unchallenged evidence
7. › Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld), s 10AA, s 32A
1. Defamation
2. › Limitation period
3. › Internet publication
4. › Date of publication for limitation purposes
5. › Extension of time to commence proceedings
6. › Defamation Act 2005 (Qld)
7. › Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld), s 10AA, s 32A
1. Appeal
2. › Standard of appellate review
3. › Appeal from decision under s 32A(2) Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld)
4. › Whether appeal by way of rehearing or review of discretion
5. › Whether House v The King principles apply

Quick Take

An appeal under s 32A(2) of the Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld) is by way of rehearing, not a review of discretion governed by House v The King principles. Failure to be aware of the publication of defamatory material during the limitation period is a circumstance that may satisfy the s 32A(2) criterion. Unchallenged evidence of a plaintiff's mental state and personal circumstances, including depression, financial hardship, and computer illiteracy, may be sufficient to establish that it was not reasonable to commence proceedings within the one-year limitation period, without the need for psychiatric expert evidence where the explanation is not challenged.